sad and amazing how true this is.

to find anything worthwhile in Google search you often needed to add site:reddit.com

to find anything at all on Reddit you needed Google

well, glad I don’t go to those websites anymore…

there are a few of us still bodging around out here.

I’m curious if anyone has experience with this stuff with an AMD card.

If I could finally ditch my windows gaming rig I would be a happy man.

you better watch out for the DS9 people…

people really enjoy the boot of anti-cheat on their necks.

maybe these companies could move their cheat detection to the server where they control the code. maybe don’t just send all player positions so wall-hacks become impossible. maybe use some machine learning to look at input patterns and detect when a player is sending things that don’t look human.

the list of things companies could do to actually fix cheating in pvp games is long and all they want to do is pay for ridiculous anti-cheat that impacts normal users.

ridiculous.

Anti-cheat on the client should be an anti-pattern. Devs continue to make the mistake of imagining you can control the code running on someone else’s device and waste their efforts there instead of working more on the server (preventative) or analysis (punitive) side.

The lack of religion isn’t a religion. What is so difficult about this for the religious to grasp?

At this point does Google ever do anything that isn’t awful for the consumer?

Eject, friend, eject!

I’m not sure who you’re arguing with. I was trying to make sure people aren’t handing out respect and trust willy nilly.

I guess I need to clarify that you give courtesy until and unless someone gives you an obvious reason not to. I thought that would be assumed and understood, guess that’s on me.

Courtesy should always be given. Respect and trust are earned.

this is how the fediverse starts to take over and I am here for it

Did you skip the second sentence of my comment?

Am I religious if I say there isn’t a marble at the table? Or a walnut? I don’t see one, I have no reason to believe one is there, based on how the world works elsewhere there isn’t anything there.

But you’re telling me I need to faith to avoid these beliefs in small generally round objects. I say it is you who is using faith to assume the existence of one particular type of thing there and you’re claiming I am the person operating without any evidence.

It’s ridiculous.

What you wrote doesn’t even pass the mildest smell test: there is ample evidence that forming babies hear and react to stimuli from outside the womb, for just one example.

But even if there were no evidence of a world outside the womb, I wouldn’t expect a baby to think one existed. Nor would I threaten that baby with damnation were they not to believe me without evidence.

Atheism isn’t faith-based. If you show me reproducible evidence for the existence of a god, I’ll change my tune no problem.

You are not clear on what faith is if you believe atheism to be faith-based. Atheism wouldn’t even exist if religion did not. Because religion and unfounded beliefs are so common, there is an actual name for not believing in a god. There aren’t a lot of specific terms for a lack of belief in other things without evidence.

Here, let me rephrase what’s written above:

Because an invisible pink sky elephant cannot be disproved or proved with any non-supernatural intervention, you must grapple with the imaginary to address the issue.

…

That’s not how the world works. We don’t spend any time grappling with things for which there is no evidence.

So far, these things are clearly statistics with extra steps. Like you, I need to see some serious evidence before I would begin to believe this in the slightest.

Two modern commentators, author Albert Jack[17] and Messianic Rabbi Richard Pustelniak,[18] claim that the original meaning of the expression was that the ties between people who have made a blood covenant (or have shed blood together in battle) were stronger than ties formed by “the water of the womb”, thus “The blood of the covenant is thicker than the water of the womb”. Neither of the authors cite any sources to support their claim.

I have heard this story of the meaning being the opposite, but it comes from people with no history background who cite no sources.

So maybe the contrarians in these comments can cite some actual reasons why they’re claiming this is all wrong instead of glib rejoinders.

Both sides are all just humans being the worst we have to offer as a species.

Egged on by ridiculous stories about men in the sky, they fight for no reason when we could all just treat each other as human.

Same. Thought maybe some local woodworker produced a beautiful lectern.

No, turns out it’s from amazon with some spray paint and Arkansas is just being Arkansas.

Not going to agree with the commenter above, but I want to point out that this happens a lot:

A person who holds views that are detrimental to others comes to a community of those people and cries “why, when I am not quite like other people who hold these views, but agree with them on the detrimental stuff about you, do you not accept me?”

The people in the community try repeatedly to explain why holding views that harm others is harmful and that the person asking may need to revaluate their own views.

The person then says they’re being attacked. Everything they predicted about this community is coming true! They feel like they’re being kicked out!

And they are! Because when they came to engage then didn’t change, let alone evaluate, any of their own views, the community rightly showed them back to the door until they are ready to actually listen and put themselves in someone else’s shoes.

I am sure you feel like you have been badly treated at this point. What you do with that now is up to you. I’ll say this: I have no hate for you, I would like nothing more than to give you some feedback that might help change how you view some things. I hope there is enough food for thought here for everyone.